From: Yuri Tikhonov <yur@emcraft.com>
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Fwd: Re: md raid acceleration and the async_tx api
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:15:23 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200708311415.23623.yur@emcraft.com> (raw)
Hi Dan,
On Thursday 30 August 2007 23:34, you wrote:
...
> Looking at it again I see that what I added would not affect the
> failure you are seeing. However I noticed that you are using a broken
> version of the stripe-queue and cache_arbiter patches. In the current
> revisions the dev_q->flags field has been moved back to dev->flags
> which fixes a data corruption issue and could potentially address the
> hang you are seeing.
Thank you for pointing this.
Though I do not think that this addresses the hang-up I see since I did run
the similar tests using your even older "h/w accelerated RAID-5" patch-set
(with no queues) and observed the same hang-up too.
> The latest revisions are:
> raid5: add the stripe_queue object for tracking raid io requests (rev2)
> raid5: use stripe_queues to prioritize the "most deserving" requests (rev6)
>
> > Note that before applying your patch I rolled my fix in the
> > ops_complete_biofill() function back. Do I understand it right that your
> > patch should be used *instead* of my one rather than *with* it ?
>
> You understood correctly. The attached patch integrates your change
> to keep R5_Wantfill set while also protecting the 'more_to_read' case.
> Please try it on top of the latest stripe-queue changes [1] (instead
> of the other proposed patches) .
I've successfully run the patched RAID-5 driver on my h/w setup: no hang-ups
were observed.
Note that I still used the broken version of the stripe-queue (so I'd
adapted your patch a little). As soon as I upgrade my stripe-queue and
cache_arbiter patches up to your latest version I'll retest the bonnie++
hang-up and report about the results.
One question, I cannot find the corresponding patches in your
git://lost.foo-projects.org/~dwillia2/git/iop tree, so, is it right that the
latest revision of the the stripe-queue and cache_arbiter patches you posted
here were on 22/07/07:
[GIT PATCH 0/2] stripe-queue for 2.6.23 consideration
[GIT PATCH 1/2] raid5: add the stripe_queue object for tracking raid io
requests (take2)
[GIT PATCH 2/2] raid5: use stripe_queues to prioritize the "most deserving"
requests (take4)
?
Regards, Yuri
reply other threads:[~2007-08-31 10:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200708311415.23623.yur@emcraft.com \
--to=yur@emcraft.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).